The Movie Review and Discussion Thread

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by lDlisturb3d

Citizen Kane

[Show spoiler]
Director: Orson Welles
Writers: Herman J. Mankiewicz, andOrson Welles
Stars: Orson Welles, Joseph Cotten and Dorothy Comingore

"How can one word describe a man's whole life?"

Plot(IMDb): Following the death of a publishing tycoon, news reporters scramble to discover the meaning of his final utterance.

My Take: Citizen Kane has be awarded from many sources as the "Greatest Film of all time". Watching this film and taking every aspect into consideration I can't agree. While Citizen Kane has aged quite well it still isn't what I was expecting and the world of cinema. The story itself could be interesting for some, and for me it caught my attention just a bit. The story of Charles Foster Kane's life was pretty interesting but the not very entertaining. A film with this grand label should have every aspect covered, great story, great cinematography and last but not least entertaining. I cant deny the fact that Kane's road for love ultimately became his down fall but at the same time the way it was delivered was a bit boring. Kane starts off as a young ambitious business man that want nothing but the best for the working class american but in his struggle for perfection he forgets about all the rules and personal morals he set to to make the dream a reality. He ultimately becomes what he wanted to rid the world of news of. The Art, Direction and Acting of this film was flawless nothing less than an "A" but the story was not great enough to be named "Greatest Movie of All Time" There was no emotional connection between me and Kane because I could relate to his situation. Should I blame the Director or the Story? The Story because the character development was present but the story wasn't that in-depth to make me care.

Conclusion: Citizen Kane has aged well and it still a good slow burning film but its absurd title "Greatest Movie of All Time" is a joke. If im missing something in the film then thats my fault but there's really nothing to miss. Now for the meaning of "Rosebud". I simply think its just an ideal the Kane wanted more than anything. Love, to be loved and the only place he received this unconditional love was through his mother. I could be wrong though. Decent movie at best but there is a great demonstration of cinematography and dialogue.

OVERRATED BUT STILL OK

3/5

Agreed; it's got brilliant cinematography, but it's pretty darn dull.

I might still get a copy when it hits Blu-Ray.

[lDlisturb3d]

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

Agreed; it's got brilliant cinematography, but it's pretty darn dull.

I might still get a copy when it hits Blu-Ray.

Thank you!! I had to argue all week about my thoughts . I was just being honest. Maybe its suffering from the hype affect...... Naw it was dull

[lDlisturb3d]

Originally Posted by Diesel

Buried

[Show spoiler]

• 2010 | R | 95 Minutes
  
  
• Director: Rodrigo Cortés
  
  
• Starring: Ryan Reynolds
  
  
• Drama | Mystery | Thriller
  
  
• First Time Viewing

I was really mad that this movie never came to my theater because I wanted to see it quite a bit. So I was to finally get to check it out today....it was worth the !


Paul Conroy is taken hostage and buried alive in a coffin. He has to get someone to give his captors $5M before 9 or...

[Show spoiler]they're going to take him to Seaworld

.

The movie is set entirely in the coffin with Paul

[Show spoiler]besides a couple videos he sees of his co-worker who is also a hostage.

It's a very claustrophobic film, probably as claustrophobic as your going to get...unless there is a movie about a person in a smaller box that I am not thinking of

Anyway, the idea is executed perfectly. At first it's, "Okay, well this dude is stuck in a coffin...that sucks" then shortly the tension builds and builds and builds for the remainder of the runtime.

Every time

[Show spoiler]someone puts him on hold

I was

For the majority of the 95 minutes you will be sitting there going
At least I was; I was completely wrapped up in Reynold's character. Every emotion he was feeling in that box I was feeling.

Then there's the part where

[Show spoiler]he cuts his finger off

And of course

[Show spoiler]the ending, "I'm sorry Paul...I'm so sorry..."

Like I said, excellently executed and fantastically acted by Reynolds.

I'm not speaking from actual knowledge but I'm going to assume some people thought he was too panicky or made stupid decisions (

[Show spoiler]lighting a bloody bonfire to kill a snake while in a wooden box!

or

[Show spoiler]using that lighter SO much....though that snake came in and out through a hole, so I suppose there was at least a little oxygen getting into the box letting him not die sooner

) but he was

[Show spoiler]a truck driver from Michigan who is buried alive after being ambushed in a war zone (and seeing people he knows die) who also suffers from panic attacks...yea, I don't think he's the type of person who would be calm, cool and collected in this situation.

So no problem there for me. I thought Reynolds was great.


There were things that bugged me, like the part where the

[Show spoiler]phone is CLEARLY upside when he is using it.

The specific

[Show spoiler]Youtube

name drop made me go Just say

[Show spoiler]the video was leaked to the Internet. For some reason referring specifically to Youtube took me out of the movie for a moment.

And the fact that

[Show spoiler]no one knows the number to his phone because it is being blocked or something and can't be traced...yet his guy from work calls him on it

...

I think that was it that bugged me about the movie, of course I may be forgetting something. But even so, they were just small things that annoyed me in an otherwise highly "enjoyable" film.

Don't clip your fingernails before this one, you'll need something to bite off.

Rating - 4.5/5

Yeah i agree, for the most part. Very intense and better yet well acted. I respect the fact that the entire movie was shot with him in a box. The ending was great and his character was good for the most part. Some of the things he was saying made me scratch my head. Then i had to remind myself that everyone doesn't think alike and he's stressed the f*ck out. Anyway good review. I gave it a 4/5

[KilloWertz]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

Thats a whole lotta spoilas there. If netflix woulda shipped this on Monday, I could be chatting with you about it. First time ever that they didnt send a new release on the Monday before. Now its a "long wait".

I'm not quite sure why, but things seemed to be a little slow this week. I sent back a movie on Saturday and they didn't get it back on Monday like they usually do, which had me worried that I wouldn't be getting RED this week. They finally got the movie back today and now RED has been sent out.

[Show spoiler]I will see Buried soon.

[volcomsocal]

The Illusionist - 2006

I wasn't sure what I was going to get having already seen The Prestige. They both came out the same year and they're both magician movies. I really had no expectations going into watching The Illusionist.

This will be a short review, because honestly, I would have to watch this movie again to give a more detailed, lengthy review.

At times I felt the movie was being rushed, but at other times, I felt the movie was too drawn out. It felt a little inconsistent. Before the ending came about, I felt that this movie was just average. But the last 10 minutes or so really pushed it over the edge into a very good movie... not excellent though. Too many inconsistencies held this movie back from being excellent. I felt that The Prestige was an overall consistently better movie than The Illusionist, but The Illusionist's ending had a great payoff to an otherwise average movie.

PQ was pretty good, nothing excellent 3.5/5

AQ seemed fine, nothing excellent 3.5/5

What kept me entertained was the storyline, and that's what really counts.

Overall, I enjoyed this movie, and would watch it again. Recommended

3.75/5

[jhiggy23]

Originally Posted by lDlisturb3d

Hotel Rwanda

Director: Terry George
Writers: Keir Pearson, and Terry George
Stars: Don Cheadle, Sophie Okonedo and Joaquin Phoenix

"Good connections can go a long way..."

Plot(IMDb): The true-life story of Paul Rusesabagina, a hotel manager who housed over a thousand Tutsi refugees during their struggle against the Hutu militia in Rwanda.

My Take: First off you never realize that the movie is 2hrs long. The characters are strong and the story is gritty and unbelievable. Genocide is always a rough topic but even more rough to watch it happen. This movie was very touching and very informative, the emotional connection was very strong and the ending was more than warming but still leaving behind a dry sore throat. I thought the movie was 5 stars all the way, direction was great, the story was great and the acting was great. This is by far the best i've seen Don Cheadle. His acting was really amazing and i love the meaning behind his character. I especially loved the fact that this movie and others like (Schindler's List) show the value of money during situations like this. This movie is really deep with an strong emotional connection to anyone who is normal when it comes to compassion and caring for others. There are so many different type of characters in this movie that you can't tell who's good or bad (moral wise). Another great thing this film highlights like others is the power of media. We all know that media can help a situation or making it incredibly worse.

Conclusion: This film is right behind Schindler's List, im not saying its as great but to be short I will never forget this film. There are many movies that show genocide but they lack and the character development and overall story. You cant just write a script talking about killings and expect it to be golden, it has to bring something much more, Hotel Rwanda fills that black hole with great compassion.

MUST SEE

5/5

[Foggy]

Originally Posted by Diesel

Buried

[Show spoiler]

• 2010 | R | 95 Minutes
  
  
• Director: Rodrigo Cortés
  
  
• Starring: Ryan Reynolds
  
  
• Drama | Mystery | Thriller
  
  
• First Time Viewing

I was really mad that this movie never came to my theater because I wanted to see it quite a bit. So I was to finally get to check it out today....it was worth the !


Paul Conroy is taken hostage and buried alive in a coffin. He has to get someone to give his captors $5M before 9 or...

[Show spoiler]they're going to take him to Seaworld

.

The movie is set entirely in the coffin with Paul

[Show spoiler]besides a couple videos he sees of his co-worker who is also a hostage.

It's a very claustrophobic film, probably as claustrophobic as your going to get...unless there is a movie about a person in a smaller box that I am not thinking of

Anyway, the idea is executed perfectly. At first it's, "Okay, well this dude is stuck in a coffin...that sucks" then shortly the tension builds and builds and builds for the remainder of the runtime.

Every time

[Show spoiler]someone puts him on hold

I was

For the majority of the 95 minutes you will be sitting there going
At least I was; I was completely wrapped up in Reynold's character. Every emotion he was feeling in that box I was feeling.

Then there's the part where

[Show spoiler]he cuts his finger off

And of course

[Show spoiler]the ending, "I'm sorry Paul...I'm so sorry..."

Like I said, excellently executed and fantastically acted by Reynolds.

I'm not speaking from actual knowledge but I'm going to assume some people thought he was too panicky or made stupid decisions (

[Show spoiler]lighting a bloody bonfire to kill a snake while in a wooden box!

or

[Show spoiler]using that lighter SO much....though that snake came in and out through a hole, so I suppose there was at least a little oxygen getting into the box letting him not die sooner

) but he was

[Show spoiler]a truck driver from Michigan who is buried alive after being ambushed in a war zone (and seeing people he knows die) who also suffers from panic attacks...yea, I don't think he's the type of person who would be calm, cool and collected in this situation.

So no problem there for me. I thought Reynolds was great.


There were things that bugged me, like the part where the

[Show spoiler]phone is CLEARLY upside when he is using it.

The specific

[Show spoiler]Youtube

name drop made me go Just say

[Show spoiler]the video was leaked to the Internet. For some reason referring specifically to Youtube took me out of the movie for a moment.

And the fact that

[Show spoiler]no one knows the number to his phone because it is being blocked or something and can't be traced...yet his guy from work calls him on it

...

I think that was it that bugged me about the movie, of course I may be forgetting something. But even so, they were just small things that annoyed me in an otherwise highly "enjoyable" film.

Don't clip your fingernails before this one, you'll need something to bite off.

Rating - 4.5/5

Glad you liked it, I'm going to pick it up day one when it's out over here, I agree the ending is a

[Show spoiler]real downer

.

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

Next greatest blind-buy: “Batman: The Movie.”

[Show spoiler]So it has come to pass that multiple filmmakers and artists have left their distinctive interpretations throughout the Batman mythos. Tim Burton brought a dark film-noir gothic appeal; Christopher Nolan introduced a complex moral connection to law and crime, diving into deep psychological implications; even Joel Schumacher brought a snazzy theatrical flair to his work. So what does the original 1960s film contribute? A universe where sharks are repelled with shark bat repellant, riddles are answered with the most ridiculous answers (a sparrow with a machine gun…seriously?!), people can appear and disappear through hydration…WTF?!!

I knew what I was getting myself into though. Having caught some of the TV episodes in the past, I took a bit of a liking to the upbeat adventurous spirit, the megalomaniac bad guys and their outlandish plots, and the snazzy fights. Only these days can I look at it and call it cheesy, campy, and absurd. But more than anything, that just makes the movie incredibly hilarious, effectively ramping up the entertainment value. The dialogue is often hilarious. The situations are wacky and stupid enough to put every other campy 60s adventures to shame (whether that be James Bond, the Prisoner, or whatever).

As such, the story sucks and the movie is cheap. If there is any redeeming cinematic value, it’d be the groovy music; still catchy after all these years. Acting is pretty bad all around, and all characters are weak (especially compared to newer films). The story kinda goes all over the place, hopping from one silly fight to another. Production value (sets, props, costumes) has always looked cheap for this old franchise. Photography is…pretty good actually. And I gotta admire some of the artsy effects; the appearance of words during a fight scene is still amusing (so “urkk!” is a real onomatopoeia?), and the opening title screens seemed quite psychedelic.

But for the most part, it’s a movie so bad that it’s hilarious. This epic piece of cinematic art shall stand tall and proud next to others bearing the same value, such as the original “Inglorious Bastards,” “The Spirit,” and countless Uwe Boll films!

3/5 (entertainment: 5/5, story: 1/5, film: 2/5)

Recommendation: No. Unless you're the type of person who doesn't take a film too seriously and is looking for something silly to laugh at.

The Blu-Ray was worth the entire $10! The film is quite clean and adequately sharp. I think it could have been sharper and more vibrant yet, but it’s pretty solid as it is. Sound quality seemed clean and clear.

PQ: 4/5, AQ: 4/5

Now my Batman marathon is complete.

Told you it was awesome

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

Next greatest blind-buy: “Batman: The Movie.”

[Show spoiler]So it has come to pass that multiple filmmakers and artists have left their distinctive interpretations throughout the Batman mythos. Tim Burton brought a dark film-noir gothic appeal; Christopher Nolan introduced a complex moral connection to law and crime, diving into deep psychological implications; even Joel Schumacher brought a snazzy theatrical flair to his work. So what does the original 1960s film contribute? A universe where sharks are repelled with shark bat repellant, riddles are answered with the most ridiculous answers (a sparrow with a machine gun…seriously?!), people can appear and disappear through hydration…WTF?!!

I knew what I was getting myself into though. Having caught some of the TV episodes in the past, I took a bit of a liking to the upbeat adventurous spirit, the megalomaniac bad guys and their outlandish plots, and the snazzy fights. Only these days can I look at it and call it cheesy, campy, and absurd. But more than anything, that just makes the movie incredibly hilarious, effectively ramping up the entertainment value. The dialogue is often hilarious. The situations are wacky and stupid enough to put every other campy 60s adventures to shame (whether that be James Bond, the Prisoner, or whatever).

As such, the story sucks and the movie is cheap. If there is any redeeming cinematic value, it’d be the groovy music; still catchy after all these years. Acting is pretty bad all around, and all characters are weak (especially compared to newer films). The story kinda goes all over the place, hopping from one silly fight to another. Production value (sets, props, costumes) has always looked cheap for this old franchise. Photography is…pretty good actually. And I gotta admire some of the artsy effects; the appearance of words during a fight scene is still amusing (so “urkk!” is a real onomatopoeia?), and the opening title screens seemed quite psychedelic.

But for the most part, it’s a movie so bad that it’s hilarious. This epic piece of cinematic art shall stand tall and proud next to others bearing the same value, such as the original “Inglorious Bastards,” “The Spirit,” and countless Uwe Boll films!

3/5 (entertainment: 5/5, story: 1/5, film: 2/5)

Recommendation: No. Unless you're the type of person who doesn't take a film too seriously and is looking for something silly to laugh at.

The Blu-Ray was worth the entire $10! The film is quite clean and adequately sharp. I think it could have been sharper and more vibrant yet, but it’s pretty solid as it is. Sound quality seemed clean and clear.

PQ: 4/5, AQ: 4/5

Now my Batman marathon is complete.

You sir, are a glutton for punishment.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by killowertz

I'm not quite sure why, but things seemed to be a little slow this week. I sent back a movie on Saturday and they didn't get it back on Monday like they usually do, which had me worried that I wouldn't be getting RED this week. They finally got the movie back today and now RED has been sent out.

[Show spoiler]I will see Buried soon.

Thats way too long.

Buried is shipping to me today. Goofy, but I aint complaining.

[SquidPuppet]

Despicable Me

IMDB synopsis: When a criminal mastermind uses a trio of orphan girls as pawns for a grand scheme, he finds himself profoundly changed by the growing love between them.

This was a fun watch. Nothing earth shatteringly great, but it was cute and provided many chuckles along the way.

Gru, the evil villain/protagonist/good guy was surely lovable. The orphan girls, Margo, Edith and Agnes were adorable and easy to care for. Vector was an oddball bad guy and fun to watch. And the Minions stole the show.

The story of stealing the Moon is really just a device so we can watch Gru's heart go all mushy, learn to love, and deliver a nice cheesey happy ending. So what.

I think my favorite part was Gru's turning point at the amusement park when he nuked the entire attraction in order to "win" the stuffed unicorn.

The animation is fantastic. The voice work is great. And the sound is fabulous.

Hans Zimmers score? X 2

Just a few moments of "slow", and a few bits of "iffy" dialogue hold this back from being awesome. But I still recommend it and will be adding it to my collection.

Film 4/5
PQ 5/5
AQ 5/5

Edit: IMDB says that Heitor Pereira and Pharrell Williams did the music, but the disc says (and it sounds like) Zimmer.

[SquidPuppet]

Salt

I couldnt take it seriously and had to turn it off.

When a movie asks to be taken seriously, it shouldnt contain preposterous events.

Disjointed sequences, odd dialogue, impossible character behaviors. Meh.

Felt fake and lame and totally missed the mark for me.

I wont score it since I abandoned it.

[dag]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

Salt

I couldnt take it seriously and had to turn it off.

I wont score it since I abandoned it.

You didn't miss much. The plot descends into complete implausibility.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by dag

You didn't miss much. The plot descends into complete implausibility.

I saw a pretty big chunk. About 90 minutes.

[Foggy]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

Salt

I couldnt take it seriously and had to turn it off.

When a movie asks to be taken seriously, it shouldnt contain preposterous events.

Disjointed sequences, odd dialogue, impossible character behaviors. Meh.

Felt fake and lame and totally missed the mark for me.

I wont score it since I abandoned it.

I keep being told to watch this by a member on the site, considering I've got them to watch films before, I'm going to have to take a dive on this soon and finally checking it out It didn't seem like anything impressive on the trailers

[tbizzle]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

Salt

I couldnt take it seriously and had to turn it off.

When a movie asks to be taken seriously, it shouldnt contain preposterous events.

Disjointed sequences, odd dialogue, impossible character behaviors. Meh.

Felt fake and lame and totally missed the mark for me.

I wont score it since I abandoned it.

Interesting. The trailers never appealed to me but I'd like to give it a shot someday

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by tbizzle

Interesting. The trailers never appealed to me but I'd like to give it a shot someday

Yeah, and I am a huge fan of the "genre". I love 24 and the Bournes. Give it a shot. Maybe it will work for you.

[Batman1980]

Meet the Parents 1 and 2 - 4.5/5
PQ and AQ - 4/5
I still love the these ridiculous movies as much as when I first saw them but I cannot believe how many things go wrong in them. You wouldn't think De Niro would be good at comedy but he and Still make a hilarious duo in both movies, cannot wait to see Little Fockers when it comes out.

[KilloWertz]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

Thats way too long.

Buried is shipping to me today. Goofy, but I aint complaining.

There is no real good reason why it took so long for Netflix to get my movie this week, but in the end I'm fine since I didn't end up missing out on RED.

Despicable Me

[Show spoiler]
IMDB synopsis: When a criminal mastermind uses a trio of orphan girls as pawns for a grand scheme, he finds himself profoundly changed by the growing love between them.

This was a fun watch. Nothing earth shatteringly great, but it was cute and provided many chuckles along the way.

Gru, the evil villain/protagonist/good guy was surely lovable. The orphan girls, Margo, Edith and Agnes were adorable and easy to care for. Vector was an oddball bad guy and fun to watch. And the Minions stole the show.

The story of stealing the Moon is really just a device so we can watch Gru's heart go all mushy, learn to love, and deliver a nice cheesey happy ending. So what.

I think my favorite part was Gru's turning point at the amusement park when he nuked the entire attraction in order to "win" the stuffed unicorn.

The animation is fantastic. The voice work is great. And the sound is fabulous.

Hans Zimmers score? X 2

Just a few moments of "slow", and a few bits of "iffy" dialogue hold this back from being awesome. But I still recommend it and will be adding it to my collection.

Film 4/5
PQ 5/5
AQ 5/5

Edit: IMDB says that Heitor Pereira and Pharrell Williams did the music, but the disc says (and it sounds like) Zimmer.

As for the score, Pharrell and Heitor Pereira were the ones that actually wrote the music/score for the film. If you are familiar at all with Pharrell, you'll easily be able to tell what was his stuff. Hans Zimmer was the producer.

[iam1bearcat]

Eyes Wide Shut [155 minutes]

Year: 1999
Director: Stanley Kubrick
Starring: Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman

good gravy, what a long film.

as anyone who has seen any Kubrick film knows, he takes his damn time when telling a story - both overall in general and in individual scenes with a slow, lingering camera. Eyes Wide Shut is definitely no different. it feels a lot like 2001: A Space Odyssey (a classic), but definitely isn't (not a classic is Eyes Wide Shut).

hell, i'd say Eyes Wide Shut is more confusing than 2001, which is saying a lot since many are confused beyond belief by the sci-fi masterpiece, but this, this was puzzling and left me very :shirtyeyes: to say the least.

there are plusses and minuses for Eyes Wide Shut. the acting may be some of the most bland, maybe even bad, that i've seen in quite awhile. Cruise, who i normally enjoyed is very subdued here. is that the role? stuck up doctor? yeah. but it doesn't help to have uninteresting characters in a very slow paced odd story that drags it's feet far too long.

a few plus qualities:

+ score
+ directing (for the most part, some zoom in moments felt very cheesy and "made for tv" almost)
+ atmosphere
+ cinematography
+ makes you think, kind of challenges you to question motives and actions

with that said, i still enjoyed it, and glad i bought it (was only $10) and will watch it again. and i'm sure, much like 2001, i will enjoy it more and understand it more with future viewings. i saw Eyes Wide Shut when it came out in 1999 (i was 11 ) and of course was baffled by it, and 11 years later, still baffled. but i respect it for being curiously made, and offering something that stands out amongst a midst of endless sequels and remakes in today's Hollywood.

as for a score? eesh. can't really give one now, honestly. it's not a 4/5, and it's not lower than a 2.5/5... so... let's go with a 3.25/5, but of course, always subject to change. much like Riff, putting a number on a film to show a feeling of it kind of doesn't make sense. sometimes i can say, "yes, this is a 4.5/5." but other times, i can't really 'feel' the score. this is one of those cases.

[Diesel]

No formal review, but I watched Superman/Batman: Apocalypse tonight.

It was entertaining and had some good laughs but not all that good; there are much better DC Animated Films out there (Green Lantern, Public Enemies, Return of the Joker, etc.). But having Kevin Conroy and Tim Daly as Batman and Superman is always great
Darkseid's voice was horrible though...where's Michael Ironside?!

And Superman

[Show spoiler]"going off" on Darkseid when he thought his cousin was dead

was kind of

THIS is how you make it awesome

Oh and everyone's faces looked weird.

Rating - 3/5